TaxTMI Login
🎉 Festive Offer: Flat 15% off on all plans! →⚡ Don’t Miss Out: Limited-Time Offer →
TaxTMI 
Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Supreme Court dismisses writ petition, directs appeal to prescribed authority within 30 days. Interpretation left to authority.</h1> <h3>S. Jagadeesan Versus Ayya Nadar Janaki Ammal College and Ors.</h3> The Supreme Court dismissed the writ petition and directed respondent No. 1 to appeal to the prescribed authority under Section 37 within 30 days. The ... - Issues:Challenge to the quashing of a university resolution and reinstatement order under Tamil Nadu Private Colleges (Regulation) Act, 1976.Analysis:The Supreme Court heard an appeal against the Madras High Court's decision to quash a university resolution and reinstate the appellant under the Tamil Nadu Private Colleges (Regulation) Act, 1976. The appellant argued that the High Court should not have entertained the writ petition as there was an alternative appeal remedy under Section 37 of the Act. The University reinstated the appellant based on the termination of service without prior approval, deemed illegal by the High Court. The High Court found the termination during probation did not fall under Section 19(1) of the Act, leading to the University's jurisdictional overreach. The High Court's decision hinged on interpreting 'otherwise terminated' in Section 19(1) of the Act, linking it to dismissal, removal, or reduction in rank. The appellant's counsel cited a conflicting judgment, while respondent No. 1's counsel argued against the High Court's interpretation. The Supreme Court set aside the High Court's judgment, dismissing the writ petition and directing respondent No. 1 to appeal to the prescribed authority under Section 37 within 30 days.The Supreme Court refrained from interpreting 'otherwise terminated' under Section 19(1) of the Act, focusing on the appeal process instead. The Court allowed the appeal, overturning the High Court's judgment without commenting on its correctness. Respondent No. 1 was ordered to pay costs of &8377;3000. The judgment emphasized the need for respondent No. 1 to pursue the appeal route provided under the Act, leaving the interpretation of the disputed term for the prescribed authority to decide along with other issues.
TaxTMI 
